Decision for salvage treatment after transanal endoscopic microsurgery

Completion Total Mesorectal Excision After Transanal Local Excision of Early Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Completion total mesorectal excision is recommended when local excision of early rectal cancers demonstrates high-risk histopathological features. Concerns regarding the quality of completion resections and the impact on oncological safety remain unanswered.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to summarize and analyze the outcomes associated with completion surgery and undertake a comparative analysis with primary rectal resections.

DATA SOURCES

Data sources included PubMed, Cochrane library, MEDLINE, and Embase databases up to April 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

All studies reporting any outcome of completion surgery after transanal local excision of an early rectal cancer were selected. Case reports, studies of benign lesions, and studies using flexible endoscopic techniques were not included.

INTERVENTION

The intervention was completion total mesorectal excision after transanal local excision of early rectal cancers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome measures included histopathological and long-term oncological outcomes of completion total mesorectal excision. Secondary outcome measures included short-term perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies including 646 patients met the eligibility criteria, and 8 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Patients undergoing completion surgery have longer operative times (standardized mean difference, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.23-0.75; p = 0.0002) and higher intraoperative blood loss (standardized mean difference, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.01-0.5; p = 0.04) compared with primary resections, but perioperative morbidity is comparable (risk ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.98-1.62; p = 0.08). Completion surgery is associated with higher rates of incomplete mesorectal specimens (risk ratio, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.41-6.62; p = 0.005) and lower lymph node yields (standardized mean difference, -0.26; 95% CI, -0.47 to 0.06; p = 0.01). Comparative analysis on long-term outcomes is limited, but no evidence of inferior recurrence or survival rates is found.

LIMITATIONS

Only small retrospective cohort and case-control studies are published on this topic, with considerable heterogeneity limiting the effectiveness of meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides the strongest evidence to date that completion surgery is associated with an inferior histopathological grade of the mesorectum and finds insufficient long-term results to satisfy concerns regarding oncological safety. International collaborative research is required to demonstrate noninferiority.

REGISTRATION NO

CRD42021245101.

Long-term outcomes of transanal endoscopic microsurgery for clinical complete response after neoadjuvant treatment in T2-3 rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Organ sparing by the transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) procedure is a treatment for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and complete clinical response (cCR).

AIMS

To assess the surgical and long-term oncological outcomes of TEM for the treatment in T2-3 rectal cancer after CRT and cCR.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective review of a prospective database of patients with rectal cancer who underwent TEM after CRT and cCR from April 2011 to March 2020.

RESULTS

52 patients underwent TEM during a period of 9 years. This group of patients included 27 females and 25 males. The median age was 62 (32-86) years, lesion size was 2.5 (1-4) cm, and lesion distance from the anal verge 7.3 (4-10) cm. Median operative time was 79.5 (25-120) min and hospital stay was 1 day (14 h-4 days). Morbidity rate was 13.5% and reoperation rate due to major complications was 3.8%. Final histological findings confirmed 34 (65.4%) patients with ypT0, 7 (13.5%), 6 (11.5%), and 5 (9.6%) patients with carcinoma ypT1, ypT2, and ypT3, respectively. After a median follow-up period of 86 (5-107) months, 1 (2.4%) patient had local recurrences and 3 (7.3%) distant metastases. The 5-year disease-free survival was 91.7% and 5-year overall survival 89.5%.

CONCLUSION

Our experience has shown significant rates of ypT0 and ypT1 associated with excellent long-term results. Performing TEM to treat T2-3N0 rectal cancer after CRT and cCR appears to be an oncologically safe and effective procedure.

The impact of transanal local excision of early rectal cancer on completion rectal resection without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The impact of transanal local excision (TAE) of early rectal cancer (ERC) on subsequent completion rectal resection (CRR) for unfavorable histology or margin involvement is unclear. The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive review of the literature on the impact of TAE on CRR in patients without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature up to March 2020. Medline and Cochrane libraries were searched for studies reporting outcomes of CRR after TAE for ERC. We excluded patients who had neoadjuvant CRT and endoscopic local excision. Surgical, functional, pathological and oncological outcomes were assessed. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies involving 353 patients were included. Pathology following TAE was as follows T0 = 2 (0.5%); T1 = 154 (44.7%); T2 = 142 (41.2%); T3 = 43 (12.5%); Tx = 3 (0.8%); T not reported = 9. Fifty-three percent were > T1. Abdominoperineal resection (APR) was performed in 80 (23.2%) patients. Postoperative major morbidity and mortality occurred in 22 (11.4%) and 3 (1.1%), patients, respectively. An incomplete mesorectal fascia resulting in defects of the mesorectum was reported in 30 (24.6%) cases. Thirteen (12%) patients developed recurrence: 8 (3.1%) local, 19 (7.3%) distant, 4 (1.5%) local and distant. The 5-year cancer-specific survival was 92%. Only 1 study assessed anal function reporting no continence disorders in 11 patients. In the meta-analysis, CRR after TAE showed an increased APR rate (OR 5.25; 95% CI 1.27-21.8; p 0.020) and incomplete mesorectum rate (OR 3.48; 95% CI 1.32-9.19; p 0.010) compared to primary total mesorectal excision (TME). Two case matched studies reported no difference in recurrence rate and disease free survival respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The data are incomplete and of low quality. There was a tendency towards an increased risk of APR and poor specimen quality. It is necessary to improve the accuracy of preoperative staging of malignant rectal tumors in patients scheduled for TAE.

Local recurrence after local excision of early rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of completion TME, adjuvant (chemo)radiation, or no additional treatment

BACKGROUND

The risks of local recurrence and treatment-related morbidity need to be balanced after local excision of early rectal cancer. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine oncological outcomes after local excision of pT1-2 rectal cancer followed by no additional treatment (NAT), completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) or adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy (aCRT).

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcome was local recurrence. Statistical analysis included calculation of the weighted average of proportions.

RESULTS

Some 73 studies comprising 4674 patients were included in the analysis. Sixty-two evaluated NAT, 13 cTME and 28 aCRT. The local recurrence rate for NAT among low-risk pT1 tumours was 6·7 (95 per cent c.i. 4·8 to 9·3) per cent. There were no local recurrences of low-risk pT1 tumours after cTME or aCRT. The local recurrence rate for high-risk pT1 tumours was 13·6 (8·0 to 22·0) per cent for local excision only, 4·1 (1·7 to 9·4) per cent for cTME and 3·9 (2·0 to 7·5) per cent for aCRT. Local recurrence rates for pT2 tumours were 28·9 (22·3 to 36·4) per cent with NAT, 4 (1 to 13) per cent after cTME and 14·7 (11·2 to 19·0) per cent after aCRT.

CONCLUSION

There is a substantial risk of local recurrence in patients who receive no additional treatment after local excision, especially those with high-risk pT1 and pT2 rectal cancer. The lowest recurrence risk is provided by cTME; aCRT has outcomes comparable to those of cTME for high-risk pT1 tumours, but shows a higher risk for pT2 tumours.

Outcomes of completion total mesorectal excision are not compromised by prior transanal minimally invasive surgery

AIM

Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is used increasingly often as an organ-preserving treatment for early rectal cancer. If final pathology reveals unfavourable histological prognostic features, completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) is recommended. This study is the first to investigate the results of cTME after TAMIS.

METHOD

Data were retrieved from the prospective database of the Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital. Completion TME patients were case matched with a control group of patients undergoing primary TME (pTME). Primary and secondary outcomes were surgical outcomes and oncological outcomes, respectively.

RESULTS

From 2011 to 2017, 20 patients underwent cTME and were compared with 40 patients undergoing pTME. There were no significant differences in operating time (238 min vs 226 min, P = 0.53), blood loss (137 ml vs. 158 ml, P = 0.88) or complications (45% vs 55%, P = 0.07) between both groups. There was no 90-day mortality in the cTME group. The mesorectal fascia was incomplete in three patients (15%) in the cTME group compared with no breaches in the pTME group (P = 0.083). There were no local recurrences in either group. In three patients (15%), distant metastases were detected after cTME compared with one patient (2.5%) in the pTME group (P = 0.069). After cTME patients had a 1- and 5-year disease-free survival of 85% compared with 97.5% for the pTME group (P = 0.062).

CONCLUSION

Completion TME surgery after TAMIS is not associated with increased peri- or postoperative morbidity or mortality compared with pTME surgery. After cTME surgery patients have a similar disease-free and overall survival when compared with patients undergoing pTME.

Local excision followed by early radical surgery in rectal cancer: long-term outcome

Background

In rectal cancers, radical surgery should follow local excisions, in cases of unexpected, unfavorable tumor characteristics. The oncological results of this completion surgery are inconsistent.

This retrospective cohort study assessed the clinical and long-term oncological outcomes of patients that underwent completion surgery to clarify whether a local excision compromised the results of radical surgery.

Methods

Forty-six patients were included, and the reasons for completion surgery, intraoperative complications, residual tumors, local recurrences (LRs), distant metastases, and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were assessed. The results were compared to 583 patients that underwent primary surgery without adjuvant therapy, treated with a curative intention during the same time period.

Results

The median follow-up was 14.6 years. The reasons for undergoing completion surgery were positive resection margins (24%), high-risk cancer (30%), or both (46%). Intraoperative perforations occurred in 10/46 (22%) cases. Residual tumor in the rectal wall or lymph node involvement occurred in 12/46 (26%) cases. The risk of intraoperative perforation and residual tumor increased with the pT category. Intraoperative perforations did not increase postoperative complications, but they increased the risk of LRs in cases of intramural residual tumors (p = 0.003). LRs occurred in 2.6% of pT1/2 and 29% of pT3 tumors. Both the 5- and 10-year CSS rates were 88.8% (95% CI 80.0–98.6). Moreover, the LRs of patients with pT1/2 cancers were lower in patients with completion surgery than in patients with primary surgery.

Conclusions

Rectal wall perforations at the local excision site and residual cancer were the main risks for poor oncological outcomes associated with completion surgery. Local excisions followed by early radical surgery did not appear to compromise outcomes compared to patients with primary surgery for pT1/2 rectal cancer. Improvements in clinical staging should allow more appropriate selection of patients that are eligible for a local excision of rectal cancer.

Salvage TME following TEM: a possible indication for TaTME

BACKGROUND

Salvage surgery after transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) has shown mixed results. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) might be advantageous in this population. The aim of this study was to assess the short-term oncologic and operative outcomes of salvage surgery after TEM, comparing TaTME to conventional salavge TME (sTME).

METHODS

Consecutive patients treated with salvage surgery after TEM were identified. Patients who underwent TaTME were compared to those who had conventional sTME. The primary outcome was the ability to perform an appropriate oncologic procedure defined by a composite outcome (negative distal margins, negative radial margins and complete or near complete mesorectum specimen).

RESULTS

During the study period, 41 patients had salvage surgery after TEM. Of those, 11 patients had TaTME while 30 patients had sTME. All patients in the TaTME group met the composite outcome of appropriate oncologic procedure compared to 76.7% for the conventional sTME group (p = 0.19). TaTME was associated with significantly higher rates of sphincter preservation (100 vs. 50%, p = 0.01), higher rates of laparoscopic surgery (100 vs. 23.3%, p < 0.001) and lower rates of conversion to open surgery (9.1 vs. 57%, p < 0.001). No difference was found in postoperative morbidity (36.3 vs. 36.7%, p = 0.77).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrates that for patients requiring salvage surgery after TEM, TaTME is associated with significantly higher rates of sphincter-sparing surgery when compared to conventional transabdominal TME while producing adequate short-term oncologic outcomes. Salvage surgery after TEM might be a clear indication for TaTME rather than conventional surgery.

Does previous transanal excision for early rectal cancer impair surgical outcomes and pathologic findings of completion total mesorectal excision? Results of a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Transanal excision (TAE) is increasingly used in the treatment of early rectal cancer because of lower rate of both postoperative complications and postsurgical functional disorders as compared with total mesorectal excision (TME) OBJECTIVE: To compare in a meta-analysis surgical outcomes and pathologic findings between patients who underwent TAE followed by completion proctectomy with TME (TAE group) for early rectal cancer with unfavorable histology or incomplete resection, and those who underwent primary TME (TME group).

METHODS

The Medline and Cochrane Trials Register databases were searched for studies comparing short-term outcomes between patients who underwent TAE followed by completion TME versus primary TME. Studies published until December 2016 were included. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.0 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK).

RESULTS

Meta-analysis showed that completion TME after TAE was significantly associated with increased reintervention rate (OR=4.28; 95% CI, 1.10-16.76; P≤0.04) and incomplete mesorectal excision rate (OR=5.74; 95% CI, 2.24-14.75; P≤0.0003), as compared with primary TME. However there both abdominoperineal amputation and circumferential margin invasion rates were comparable between TAE and TME groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that previous TAE impaired significantly surgical outcomes and pathologic findings of completion TME as compared with primary TME. First transanal approach during completion TME might be evaluated in order to decrease technical difficulties.

The feasibility of laparoscopic rectal resection in patients undergoing reoperation after transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM)

BACKGROUND

The success of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for early rectal cancer depends on proper indications and strict patient selection. When unfavorable pathologic features are identified after TEM operation, total mesorectal excision is recommended to minimize the risk of recurrence. In this study, data were collected in a retrospective series of patients to determine the results of laparoscopic reoperation after TEM.

METHODS

All patients underwent an accurate rectal-digital examination and clinical tumor staging by transanal endosonography, CT, and/or MRI. The histologic examination included an evaluation of the free margins, depth of tumor infiltration according to International Union Against Cancer guidelines, degree of tumor differentiation, and the presence of lymphovascular and perineural invasion. When a high-risk tumor was identified, reoperation was performed within 6 weeks from TEM. The patients were divided into two groups according to the procedure performed: laparoscopic anterior resection (LAR) or laparoscopic abdominal perineal amputation (LAPR).

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients (5.3%) underwent reoperation: 38 underwent LAR and 30 underwent LAPR. The mean operative time was 148.24 min (± 35.8, p = 0.62). Meanwhile, the mean distance of the TEM scar from the anal verge differed statistically between the two groups (p = 0.003) and was statistically correlated with abdominal perineal amputation (p = 0.0001) in multivariate analysis. Conversion to open surgery was required in 6 patients (15.7%) in the LAR group and 3 patients (10%) in the LAPR group (p = 0.38). The histologic examination revealed residual cancer cells in 3 cases (3 pT2N0) and 1 case (1 pT3N0), respectively, and lymph node metastases in 4 cases. No residual neoplasms were detected in the remaining 60 cases (88.3%). After a mean follow-up of 108 months, the overall disease-free survival was 98% (95% CI 88-99%).

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, reoperation after TEM using a laparoscopic approach is feasible and safe, with low conversion rates and optimal postoperative results.

Hybrid transanal and total mesorectal excision after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for unfavourable early rectal cancer: a report of two cases

Completion total mesorectal excision (TME) is a rare but complex procedure after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early rectal cancer with unfavourable final histology. Two cases are reported when completion TME was performed after upfront transanal partial mesorectal dissection. Intact non-perforated TME specimens with negative and adequate distal and circumferential margins were created. The quality of both total mesorectal excisions was complete and distal margins were sufficient. We believe that our technique might be a way of approaching completion TME after TEM, especially in cases of low rectal cancer.

Meta-analysis of oncological outcomes after local excision of pT1-2 rectal cancer requiring adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy or completion surgery

BACKGROUND

Completion total mesorectal excision (TME) is advised for high-risk early (pT1/pT2) rectal cancer following transanal removal. The main objective of this meta-analysis was to determine oncological outcomes of adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy as a rectum-preserving alternative to completion TME.

METHODS

A literature search using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library was performed in February 2015. Studies had to include at least ten patients with pT1/pT2 adenocarcinomas that were removed transanally and followed by either adjuvant chemoradiotherapy or completion surgery. A weighted average of the logit proportions was determined for the pooled analyses of subgroups according to treatment modality and pT category.

RESULTS

In total, 14 studies comprising 405 patients treated with adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy and seven studies comprising 130 patients treated with completion TME were included. Owing to heterogeneity it was not possible to compare the two strategies directly. However, the weighted average local recurrence rate for locally excised pT1/pT2 rectal cancer treated with adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy was 14 (95 per cent c.i. 11 to 18) per cent, and 7 (4 to 14) per cent following completion TME. The weighted averages for distance recurrence were 9 (6 to 14) and 9 (5 to 16) per cent respectively. Weighted averages for local recurrence rate after adjuvant chemo(radiotherapy) and completion TME for pT1 were 10 (4 to 21) and 6 (3 to 15) per cent respectively. Corresponding averages for pT2 were 15 (11 to 21) and 10 (4 to 22) per cent respectively.

CONCLUSION

A higher recurrence rate after transanal excision and adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy must be balanced against the morbidity and mortality associated with mesorectal excision. A reasonable approach is close follow-up and salvage mesorectal surgery as needed.

Rectal cancer: An evidence-based update for primary care providers

Rectal adenocarcinoma is an important cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and key anatomic differences between the rectum and the colon have significant implications for management of rectal cancer. Many advances have been made in the diagnosis and management of rectal cancer. These include clinical staging with imaging studies such as endorectal ultrasound and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, operative approaches such as transanal endoscopic microsurgery and laparoscopic and robotic assisted proctectomy, as well as refined neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies. For stage II and III rectal cancers, combined chemoradiotherapy offers the lowest rates of local and distant relapse, and is delivered neoadjuvantly to improve tolerability and optimize surgical outcomes, particularly when sphincter-sparing surgery is an endpoint. The goal in rectal cancer treatment is to optimize disease-free and overall survival while minimizing the risk of local recurrence and toxicity from both radiation and systemic therapy. Optimal patient outcomes depend on multidisciplinary involvement for tailored therapy. The successful management of rectal cancer requires a multidisciplinary approach, with the involvement of enterostomal nurses, gastroenterologists, medical and radiation oncologists, radiologists, pathologists and surgeons. The identification of patients who are candidates for combined modality treatment is particularly useful to optimize outcomes. This article provides an overview of the diagnosis, staging and multimodal therapy of patients with rectal cancer for primary care providers.

Multidisciplinary treatment of rectal cancer in 2014: Where are we going?

In the present review we discuss the recent developments and future directions in the multimodal treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer, with respect to staging and re-staging modalities, to the current role of neoadjuvant chemo-radiation and to the conservative and more limited surgical approaches based on tumour response after neoadjuvant combined therapy. When initial tumor staging is considered a high accuracy has been reported for T pre-treatment staging, while preoperative lymph node mapping is still suboptimal. With respect to tumour re-staging, all the current available modalities still present a limited accuracy, in particular in defining a complete response. The role of short vs long-course radiotherapy regimens as well as the optimal time of surgery are still unclear and under investigation by means of ongoing randomized trials. Observational management or local excision following tumour complete response are promising alternatives to total mesorectal excision, but need further evaluation, and their use outside of a clinical trial is not recommended. The preoperative selection of patients who will benefit from neoadjuvant radiotherapy or not, as well as the proper identification of a clinical complete tumour response after combined treatment modalities,will influence the future directions in the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer.

Local excision after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in advanced rectal cancer: a national multicenter analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the clinical availability of local excision (LE) for advanced rectal cancer without lymph node metastasis after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (nCRT) in Korea.

METHODS

From June 2000 to October 2009, 40 patients with cT2-3N0M0 rectal cancer underwent nCRT followed by LE according to a retrospective multicenter analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 40 patients, 22 were men and 18 were women. Eighteen patients were cT2, and 22 patients were cT3. The median follow-up duration was 38 months. Three patients (7.5%) had morbidity after LE. Four patients (10%) had recurrence (local recurrence [1 patient] and systemic metastasis [3 patients]). The 3-year disease-free survival rate was 85.9%. Only pCR was a recurrence-related prognostic factor (P = .040).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the current study was not a randomized controlled study, LE after nCRT in T2-3N0 rectal cancer patients appears to be a safe and effective treatment, especially in pCR patients.

Modern rectal cancer multidisciplinary treatment: the role of radiation and surgery

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of rectal cancer has evolved during the last few decades due to more in-depth knowledge of rectal cancer biology and major advances in the field of preoperative staging, medical management and surgical techniques. Consequently, treatment strategies are shifting moving towards a more personalized approach based on the response to treatment. Currently topics of controversy are centered around the indication for neoadjuvant radiation therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer and the role of surgery in patients with complete clinical response after neoadjuvant combined modality therapy. This manuscript aims to critically evaluate the evolution of treatment of rectal cancer during the last three decades and future directions.

METHODS

A review of the literature has been performed in PubMed/Medline electronic databases.

RESULTS

Treatment modalities are moving towards a tailored approach to rectal cancer patients based on the response to chemoradiation. A "wait-and-see" approach and local excision by Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) are strategies recently proposed in case of complete clinical response.

CONCLUSIONS

The standard of care still requires that locally advanced rectal cancer should be treated by neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy followed by total mesorectal excision, including patients with a clinical complete response. Further evidence is needed to endorse a "wait-and-see" strategy and to define the role of TEM.

Previous transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal cancer represents a risk factor for an increased abdominoperineal resection rate

BACKGROUND

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) represents a surgical option in the treatment of selected early rectal cancers. However, when definitive histopathology shows negative prognostic factors, rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) is recommended to reduce the risk of recurrence. No studies have yet analyzed the impact of previous TEM on the perioperative outcomes of immediate laparoscopic TME (LTME) for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of LTME after TEM for rectal cancer.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective analysis of a prospective database. All patients undergoing LTME within 8 weeks after full-thickness TEM for rectal cancer between January 2001 and December 2011 were included. Each patient was matched on the basis of demographic and clinical characteristics with two patients undergoing primary LTME for rectal cancer during the same period. Age, gender, body mass index, tumor distance from the anal verge, tumor size, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, previous TEM, rectal wall defect size created during TEM, and intraoperative complications were included in a multivariate analysis to identify risk factors for abdominoperineal resection (APR).

RESULTS

A total of 17 patients undergoing TEM followed by LTME were compared to 34 patients undergoing primary LTME. Mean operative time of LTME after TEM was significantly higher (206 vs. 188 min, P = 0.025). APR was more frequently performed after TEM [odds ratio (OR) 5.25, P = 0.028] and in male patients (OR 9.04, P = 0.034). On multivariate analysis, a previous TEM was the only independent predictor of APR (OR 4.13, P = 0.046). The incidence and severity of postoperative complications were similar in both groups. Mesorectum integrity was complete in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

LTME after TEM is a challenging procedure, with a significantly higher risk of APR compared to primary LTME. Future improvements in preoperative patient selection for TEM are needed to reduce this risk.

Management and outcome of local recurrence following transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery is a faster and safer alternative to traditional surgical treatment of adenomas and low-risk (T1) rectal tumors. However, although overall survival appears similar, transanal endoscopic microsurgery has been shown to have higher recurrence rates.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the management of patients with local recurrence after transanal endoscopic microsurgery and to evaluate their long-term outcome.

DESIGN

This study was a retrospective review of medical records.

SETTING

Patients were treated at a large tertiary-care hospital in Rome, Italy, between 1990 and 2011.

PATIENTS

Of 298 patients who underwent local excision with transanal endoscopic microsurgery, 144 patients with rectal adenocarcinoma were included in the study.

INTERVENTION

Local excision was performed with transanal endoscopic microsurgery. In all cases complete full-thickness excision was attempted.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patient characteristics, operative record, pathology report, and tumor recurrence were analyzed. Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meyer method and groups were compared with the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Tumors were classified as pT1 in 86 patients (59.7%), pT2 in 38 (26.4%), and pT3 in 20 (13.9%). Median follow-up was 85 (range, 3-234) months. Median time to recurrence was 11.5 (range, 1-62) months; 44 patients had local or distal recurrence or both. The rate of local recurrence for patients with pT1 tumors was 11.6% (10/86). A total of 27 patients (18.8%) with local recurrence were eligible for salvage surgery: 17 had radical salvage resection, 9 had transanal re-excision, and 1 refused surgery. Overall 5-year survival was 83% in all 144 patients, and 92% in patients with pT1 tumors. The overall 5-year survival rate was higher in patients who had the radical salvage procedure than in those who had transanal re-excision (69% vs 43%; p = 0.05).

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its retrospective nature, lack of technology at the beginning of the study, and the mixed nature of the study group.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome after transanal excision for rectal cancer depends on close surveillance for early detection of recurrence. In patients able to undergo surgery, endoluminal or pelvic recurrence should be treated with an immediate radical salvage operation. Overall long-term survival after local excision with transanal endoscopic microsurgery followed by radical salvage surgery in cases of local recurrence is comparable to overall survival after initial radical surgery.

The Ferguson Operating Anoscope as a Minimally Invasive Option for the Treatment of Rectal Tumors

Transanal excision of rectal tumors may be performed using the Ferguson Operating Anoscope (FOA). This retrospective case series evaluates the effectiveness of FOA for the excision of selected benign and malignant rectal tumors. The office records of 97 patients with rectal tumors who underwent FOA transanal excision by a single surgeon from 1999 through 2009 were reviewed. In the 97 patients evaluated, 99 FOA transanal excisions were performed for 39 adenocarcinomas, 55 benign tumors, and five carcinoid tumors. The tumors were 0.5 to 13.5 cm in diameter and located an average of 6.9 cm (range, 1 to 15 cm) from the anal verge. Ninety-one per cent of cases were performed as an outpatient. Postoperative complications occurred in 14 per cent with transient effects on continence in 2 per cent and a mean blood loss of 66 mL. The recurrence rate for favorable T1 rectal cancers was 4.3 per cent and for adenomas was 5.9 per cent. In early follow up of adenomas and favorable T1 carcinomas, FOA transanal excision has similar application, morbidity, and recurrence rates as reported for transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal tumors within 15 cm from the anal verge. FOA may be considered a useful option for the minimally invasive treatment of rectal tumors.

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery resection of rectal tumors: outcomes and recommendations

PURPOSE

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery provides a minimally invasive alternative to radical surgery for excision of benign and malignant rectal tumors. The purpose of this study was to review our experience with transanal endoscopic microsurgery to clarify its role in the treatment of different types of rectal pathology.

METHODS

A prospective database documented all patients undergoing transanal endoscopic microsurgery from October 1996 through June 2008. We analyzed patient and operative factors, complications, and tumor recurrence. For recurrence analysis, we excluded patients with fewer than 6 months of follow-up, previous excisions, known metastases at initial presentation, and those who underwent immediate radical resection following transanal endoscopic microsurgery.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-nine patients underwent transanal endoscopic microsurgery for benign (n = 158) and malignant (n = 111) tumors. Procedure-related complications (21%) included urinary retention (10.8%), fecal incontinence (4.1%), fever (3.8%), suture line dehiscence (1.5%), and bleeding (1.5%). Local recurrence rates for 121 benign and 83 malignant tumors were 5% for adenomas, 9.8% for T1 adenocarcinoma, 23.5% for T2 adenocarcinoma, 100% for T3 adenocarcinoma, and 0% for carcinoid tumors. All 6 (100%) recurrent adenomas were retreated with endoscopic techniques, and 8 of 17 (47%) recurrent adenocarcinomas underwent salvage procedures with curative intent.

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery is a safe and effective method for excision of benign and malignant rectal tumors. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery can be offered for (1) curative resection of benign tumors, carcinoid tumors, and select T1 adenocarcinomas, (2) histopathologic staging in indeterminate cases, and (3) palliative resection in patients medically unfit or unwilling to undergo radical resection.

Preoperative staging and treatment options in T1 rectal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Major rectal resection for T1 rectal cancer offers more than 95% cancer specific five-year survival to patients surviving the first 30 days after surgery. A significant further improvement by development of the surgical technique may not be possible. Improvements in the total survival rate have to come from a more differentiated treatment modality, taking patient and procedure related risk factors into account. Subgroups of patients have operative mortality risks of 10% or more. Operative complications and long-term side effects after rectum resection are frequent and often severe.

RESULTS

Local treatment of T1 cancers combined with close follow-up, early salvage surgery or later radical resection of local recurrences or with chemo-radiation may lead to fewer severe complications and comparable, or even better, long-term survival. Accurate preoperative staging and careful selection of patients for local or non-operative treatment are mandatory. As preoperative staging, at present, is not sufficiently accurate, strategies for completion, salvage or rescue surgery is important, and must be accepted by the patient before local treatment for cure is initiated.

RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that polyps with low-risk T1 cancers should be treated with endoscopic snare resection in case of Haggitt's stage 1 or 2. TEM is recommended if resection margins are uncertain after snare resection for Haggitt's stage 3 and 4, and for sessile and flat, low-risk T1 cancers. Average risk patients with high-risk T1 cancers should be offered rectum resection, but old and comorbid patients with high-risk T1 cancers should be treated individually according to objective criteria as age, physical performance as well as patient's preference. All patients treated for cure with local resection or non-surgical methods should be followed closely.